Linked by Amjith Ramanujam on Tue 16th Dec 2008 07:02 UTC, submitted by stonyandcher
Apple Microsoft's first-ever iPhone application is a slick photo viewer with a browsing capability that handles a large number of photos on a mobile device screen. The Seadragon mobile application is free through Apple's application store. It a product of Microsoft's Live Labs division, which focuses on developing Web-based technology and applications. Seadragon incorporates the Deep Zoom feature, which is also integrated into Silverlight 2, Microsoft's multimedia tool. It allows a user to quickly magnify a particular area of a photo, regardless of its size.
Thread beginning with comment 340490
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: And Apple Allowed it!?!?
by Moulinneuf on Tue 16th Dec 2008 16:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: And Apple Allowed it!?!?"
Moulinneuf
Member since:
2005-07-06

White elephant , elephant white ... as for making sense I do , you just don't like what is being shown and have a disagreeing false ideology and some problem with reality and have to put me in a box to fit your view that you have about me.

- You don't seem to disagree with my KHTML point , just don't get it that they can't be attributed the merit of porting it to windows and needed to go into details that say the exact same thing I said mixed with your own false opinion.

- iTune is Gratis , they are not using it to sell software (1) , Apple at first was not interested in porting iTune to windows as it was an advantage for Apple computer's over the other's , but wanted the OEM to sell there iPods. They where forced into it.

(1) They do sell software for Iphone and iPod , but those same application are not pushed on other OS that have iTune , it's iTune Store that sell them anyway.

- It's not Apple who is responsible of the porting , most codecs are done by other company , in order for them to adopt the Quictime format they made the request that it worked on Windows.

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_Type_Font

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Unix_Printing_System

Michael Sweet, who owns Easy Software Products, started developing CUPS in 1997. The first public betas appeared in 1999.[1] The original design of CUPS used the LPD protocol, but due to limitations in LPD and vendor incompatibilities the Internet Printing Protocol (IPP) was chosen instead. CUPS was quickly adopted as the default printing system for several Linux distributions, including Red Hat Linux.[citation needed] In March 2002, Apple Inc. adopted CUPS as the printing system for Mac OS X 10.2.[2] In February 2007, Apple Inc. hired chief developer Michael Sweet and purchased the CUPS source code.[3]

About your buy comment :

License : GNU General Public License, GNU Lesser General Public License.

- I do , so do the millions of windows user's and other's OS who would be interested in having iLife and iWork and other Apple software on other OS. Or the reverse having other company software on Apple systems like the iPhone.

What you don't get is that people are allowed to disagree with you , I don't loose reason and rationality when I discuss them , but you do when you see me write about them.

Edited 2008-12-16 16:37 UTC

Reply Parent Score: -3

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

You really hate Apple don't you?

I stated that Apple software is available for Windows and x86 *nix and then followed to back that up with examples.

So what if Safari uses webkit. So does Google Crome and Konqurer - all of which are massively different from each other and from Safari.

And so what if Apple only reluctantly ported iTunes and quicktime player. They still ported it (or licenced 3rd party developers to port Apple's software)

And so what if my examples were free products, they're still owned by Apple.

All of your replies have been nothing more than dancing around the fact I stated earlier that Apple software does run on "normal" x86 platforms.
Whether they ported it themselves, programmed the original technology or whatever is completely irrelevent to the point I made.

Reply Parent Score: 4